The Castle Doctrine will be offered as an amendment today on the House Floor.

More than likely it will be handled by a move to "Table the Motion" or by a "Point of Order" saying that it is non-germain.

But, we'll try.

Tony

Followed by another email confident that this will pass on the floor if it can get out of committee.

Ms Bigham,

I'm forced to write once again regarding my displeasure with one of your votes.

On Thursday, April 3 Rep Cornish attached the "Castle Doctrine Bill" as an amendment to a Public Safety Bill. The Speaker wanted the amendment pulled claiming that it was not germane to the bill. You, unfortunately, voted with the Speaker, once again preventing important legislation from having a chance to pass.

To say the HF498 is not germane to a Public Safety Bill is ridicules, HF498 is about public safety, it is about allowing the the public the legal right to defend themselves from criminal attacks while in public.

Under the current law if my wife is attacked and raped in a public place she has no legal recourse except to attempt to flee-if she is unable to do that, she has no choice but to submit to being a victim of a vicious criminal.

Let's stop making the State of Minnesota a safer place for criminals and start making it safer for the good, law abiding citizens.

In closing, I would remind you again that your votes count - and so does mine

Respectfully,
[Redacted]
[Redacted], MN

Dear Ms. Swails,

I'm forced to write regarding my displeasure with one of your votes.

On Thursday, April 3 Rep Cornish attached the "Castle Doctrine Bill" as an amendment to a Public Safety Bill. The Speaker wanted the amendment pulled claiming that it was not germane to the bill. You, unfortunately, voted with the Speaker, preventing important legislation from having a chance to be heard on the House floor.

To say the HF498 is not germane to a Public Safety Bill is ridiculous: HF498 is about public safety, it is about allowing the the public the legal right to defend themselves from criminal attacks while in public.

Under the current law if my wife or daughter is attacked and raped in a public place she has no legal recourse except to attempt to flee-if she is unable to do that, she has no choice but to submit to being the victim of a vicious criminal.

There are quite a few other states that already have just this law -- tweaked slightly, from state to state, to make the language consistent with pre-existing state law:

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Michigan
Mississippi
Missouri
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota

Since you disagree with HF498, show me where, in the more than two dozen states that have similar language in their self-defense laws, authorizing scaring an attacker or not retreating has resulted in bad things happening that likely otherwise wouldn't.

Opponents to this bill use inflammatory rhetoric calling it the "Shoot First!" or the "Shoot the Avon Lady" bill: show me the statistics where this type of bill has caused harm- I'm asking you to give me the count of dead Avon ladies.

Let's offer a real-world scenario:
Suppose you are a realtor alone at an open house, or you are a teacher alone at school after hours correcting exams.
You are suddenly confronted by a knife wielding attacker who demands what can only be described as your worst nightmare.

Under current Minnesota law, if you are an unwilling participant faced with imminent death or severe bodily harm, unless you are in your own home you have a duty to retreat from the situation before you can defend yourself with lethal force.
Quick, can you make it out the door or through the window before the attacker is upon you, attempt to fight the attacker with your car keys, or save your life by stopping the attacker by exercising lethal force?

Notice I didn't say "kill" the attacker, I said "stop."
Under current law, unless you retreat, even displaying a weapon constitutes aggravated assault, and using the weapon to stop the attacker will be prosecuted as attempted murder or worse.

Decide quickly!
Better to submit to the attack and leave your fate in the hands of a rapist/murderer, or face prosecution for defending yourself?

Under current Minnesota law, if you decide to defend yourself, you will automatically be arrested and your fate will be left to a prosecuting attorney, a jury, and how much justice you can afford.

HF498 essentially amends the law by stating:
"(b) A law enforcement agency may arrest a person using force under circumstances described in this section ONLY after considering any claims or circumstances supporting self-defense."

So basically the amendment is asking the police to at least consider your claim to self defense instead of automatically arresting you.

Let's stop making the State of Minnesota a safer place for criminals and start making it safer for the good, law abiding citizens.

In closing, I would remind you again that your votes count - and so does mine

Respectfully,

eldo wrote:
I'll apologize in advance for cribbing language from Joel and parap1445, but the words in the last half of the letter are mine.

I imagine the dems will table it just like they did with the RKBA amendment. I hate to be so pessimistic, but......

Dont paint all Dems with one brush. My rep. Jeremy kailin has been good on 2a bills. Give credit where credit is due.